• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Understanding Evolution (2)

D

DerelictJunction

Guest
I don't feel that I misrepresent what you write, I challenge and disagree with what you write. You reference someone's opinion about the relative randomness of mutations, the only impetus whereby humanity was created from an alleged single life form of long long ago, and I point out the usual guesses and suppositions which commonly accompany such views. You attempt to use the term "evolution" as a monolithic term, and it isn't. Evolution must face the issue of how humanity was created from the alleged single life form of long long ago and must face the lack of evidence for the view that only random/chance mutations was the creative impetus.

Not so far, no.

There are no scientific conclusions, supported by evidence, that only random/chance mutations is the creator of humanity. There are plenty of pseudo-scientific guesses and suppositions though.

Why the faith-based atheistic Darwinist creationist viewpoint is allowed in schools while other faith-based creationist viewpoints is an ongoing question. And of course one which will continually be challenged.

Simply because you're uncomfortable with examining the implications of atheistic Darwinist creationism, and it's failure to offer evidence for the philosophical worldview, is no reason to shy away from the fact that it's no more than just another faith-based creationist viewpoint.
I'm not uncomfortable with the discussion. I just see it as going nowhere because your solution to the presentation of evidence is to say "No it's not!" and then proclaim scientific conclusions as "faith based guesses and suppositions".
You don't bother with rebutting the evidence, yet you expect others to kowtow to your endless request for evidence that you will also dismiss with your "No, it's not!".
It would be nice to declare something false and that would make it so. However, that's not how reality works.

Your use of that tactic not an honest debate, and I am surprised that you engage in it. So, I will not continue discussing that subject with you. If you wish to discuss common descent, I will reply in that topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bhsmte
Upvote 0